September 13, 2001 - September 29, 2001
Aids: Misunderstanding Mbeki
Posted: Saturday, September 29, 2001
A July 11 editorial in The Boston Globe entitled "Mbeki's Blinders on AIDS" tells us that the "tragedy of President Thako Mbeki's speech Sunday is that it reinforces a culture of denial and confusion in South Africa." The real tragedy, which such commentaries exemplify, is an American culture of blame--blame attributed to Africans and a South African government that the editorial immodestly claims "is unwilling to make HIV prevention a national crusade."
By decrying Mbeki's government in such fashion, the Globe, like many other American press agencies who have commented on Mbeki's speech, has manufactured an enemy of Western beliefs whose opinions are nothing short of the ravings of said "cultures of denial." But are his words and those of his colleagues really just products of denial and confusion?
Mbeki's Health Minister, Manto Tshabalala-Msimang, has said, "It is inappropriate to blame everything around this epidemic on the HIV virus...clearly, the relationship between HIV and other social ills afflicting our society such as poverty and disease is complex." Mbeki himself, in his opening speech at the Durban AIDS conference, reiterated this central argument: alleviating poverty and social inequalities will play a pivotal role in conquering the African AIDS crisis.
Should poverty really be a priority in conquering African AIDS? Despite damning evidence, showcased both in the scientific literature and in the popular press, the Globe's editors say "no". "Mbeki ignores the reality [emphasis ours] that AIDS exists independent of economic circumstances," they claim. As evidence, they cite American gay men, "as affluent as the rest of US society in the 1980s, when the virus raced through their ranks." The editors credit positive outcomes among this population to the "effective
public health campaign" gay American men conducted in response to the AIDS threat.
But the firm and simple "reality" that AIDS prevalence is unrelated to economics is no reality at all. Recent CDC reports indicate that HIV incidence rates are growing fastest among poor young black and poor American women. Poverty has, in fact, been established as a key determinant for both HIV infection and the subsequent acquisition of AIDS. MORE
_________________________________________________
The ten thousand strong AIDS 'community" had been outraged by earlier comments attributed to the Head of State now hosting the first world AIDS meeting ever held in a non western country. Was Mbeki with them or against them? It was a question that grew out of a simmering controversy that began month earlier when the South African President spent a few nights conducting personal research on the Internet. It led him to the views of a handful of dissident doctors and researchers who had been challenging the conventional scientific wisdom about the origins of the AIDS virus for years.
He quickly began wondering aloud if South Africa's AIDS fighting program was on the right track. Staring down the barrel of drug costs that could bankrupt his treasury and plans for economic development, he provoked a debate about the proper strategies to pursue that is still reverberating globally.
Critics quickly elevated his stance into a heresy after he invited some of those dissidents to take part in a presidential advisory panel (which also included many mainstream researcher.) The 30 member group was charged with investigating some critical issues, including the accuracy of Aids tests, the safety of certain highly toxic anti-viral drugs like AZT which has been relatively effective in blocking transmission of the disease from mother to child, and the charged issue of what causes AIDS. Does HIV lead to Aids, as most scientists insist, or are there other causes and contributing factors? It will make its report at the end of the year.
Mbeki never openly denied an HIV-Aids link but his aggressively inquiring attitude appeared to many as if he that's what he was doing. Such questioning was viewed as a distratcion, evidence that he was in denial about an infection that the UN says is present in ten percent of the country's population, or some 4.2 million people, more than in any other comparable country.
For daring to challenge the consensus, Mbeki fell, in the words of a high level White House AIDs official I spoke with, "off the program." Soon he turned into a pariah and subject for ridicule in the world press, trashed by 60 Minutes in the US and criticized by one of South Africa's leading intellectuals Dr. Mamphela Ramphele for "irresponsibility bordering on criminality."
5000 researchers and scientists world-wide issued a "Durban Declaration" to rebuke him, insisting that that HIV causes Aids, full stop. End of story. His defensive press secretary dismissed their statement as fit for the "dustbin." Local political pressure was then brought to bear on those behind the declaration to cancel a planned press conference that could turn embarrassing. Feelings polarized. Over coffee in my hotel, an HIV positive ACT UP militant from Brooklyn New York snarled, "Mbeki should be impeached and arrested." MORE
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
UN Security Council Resolutions on Israel since 1948
Posted: Friday, September 28, 2001
Res. 101 (Nov 24, 53): Expressed 'strongest censure' of Israel for the first time because of its raid on Qibya.
Res. 106 (Mar 29, 55): Condemned Israel for Ghazzah raid.
Res. 111 (Jan 19, 56): Condemned Israel for raid on Syria that killed 56 people.
Res. 127 (Jan 22, 58): Recommended Israel to suspend its no-man's zone in Jerusalem.
Res. 162 (Apr 11, 61): Urged Israel to comply with UN decisions.
Res. 171 (Apr 9, 62): Determined 'flagrant violation' by Israel in its attack on Syria.
Res. 228 (Nov 25, 66): Censured Israel for its attack on Samu in Jordan.
Res. 237 (June 14, 67): Urged Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees.
Res. 248 (Mar 24, 68): Condemned Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan.Res. 250
(Apr 27, 68): Called on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem.
Res. 251 (May 2, 68): Deeply deplored Israel's military parade in Jerusalem and declared invalid
Israel's acts to unify Jerusalem as its capital.
Res. 256 (Aug 16, 68): Condemned Israeli raids on Jordan as 'flagrant violation'.
Res. 259 (Sep 27, 68): Deplored Israel's refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation.
Res. 262 (Dec 31, 68): Condemned Israel's attack on Beirut airport destroying the entire fleet of Middle East Airlines.
Res. 265 (Apr 1, 69): Condemned Israel for air attacks on Salt in Jordan.
Res. 267 (July 3, 69): Censured Israel for administrative acts to change status of Jerusalem.
Res. 270 (Aug. 26, 69): Condemned Israel for air attack on villages in southern Lebanon.
Res. 271 (Sep 15, 69): Condemned Israel's failure to comply with UN Resolutions on Jerusalem.
Res. 279 (May 12, 70): Demanded withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon.
Res. 280 (May 19, 70): Condemned Israeli attacks against Lebanon.
Res. 285 (Sep 5, 70): Demanded immediate Israeli troop withdrawal from Lebanon.
Res. 298 (Sep 25, 71): Deplored Israel's change of status of Jerusalem.
Res. 313 (Aug 8, 72): Demanded Israel stop attacks against Lebanon.
Res. 316 (June 26, 72): Condemned Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon.
Res. 317 (July 21, 72): Deplored Israel's refusal to release Arabs abducted from Lebanon.
Res. 332 (Apr 21, 73): Condemned Israel's repeated attacks against Lebanon.
Res. 337 (Aug 15, 73): Condemned Israel for violating Lebanon's sovereignty.
Res. 347 (Apr 24, 74): Condemned Israeli attacks on Lebanon.
Res. 425 (Mar 19, 78): Called on Israel to withdraw its forces unconditionally from Lebanon.
Res. 427 (May 3, 78): Called on Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon.
Res. 444 (Jan 19, 79): Deplored Israel's lack of cooperation with UN peace forces.
Res. 446 (Mar 22, 79): Determined Israeli settlements as a 'serious obstruction' to peace, and called on Israel to abide by the Geneva Conventions.
Res. 450 (June 14, 79): Called on Israel to stop attacking Lebanon.
Res. 452 (July 20, 79): Called on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories.
Res. 465 (Mar 1, 80): Deplored Israel's settlements and asked all member States not to assist Israel's settlement programme.
Res. 467 (Apr 24, 80): Condemned Israel's military intervention in Lebanon.
Res. 468 (May 8, 80): Called on Israel to Rescind illegal expulsion of two Palestinian Mayors and a Judge, and to facilitate their return.
The History of Palestine 1895 - 1992
1895 The total population of Palestine was 500,000 of whom 47,000 were Jews who owned 0.5% of the land.
1896 Following the appearance of anti-Semitism in Europe, Theodor Herzl, the founder of Zionism tried to find a political solution for the problem in his book, 'The Jewish State'.
He advocated the creation of a Jewish state in Argentina or Palestine.
1897 The first Zionist Congress was held in Switzerland, which issued the Basle programme on the colonisation of Palestine and the establishment of the World Zionist Organisation (WZO).
1904 Fourth Zionist Congress decided to establish a national home for Jews in Argentina.
1906 The Zionist congress decided the Jewish homeland should be Palestine.
1914 With the outbreak of World War I, Britain promised the independence of Arab lands under Ottoman rule, including Palestine, in return for Arab support against Turkey which had entered the war on the side of Germany.
1916 Britain and France signed the Sykes-Picot Agreement, which divided the Arab region into zones of influence. Lebanon and Syria were assigned to France, Jordan and Iraq to Britain and Palestine was to be internationalised.
1917 Lord Balfour, the British Foreign Secretary sent a letter to the Zionist leader Lord Rothschild which later became known as "The Balfour declaration". He stated that Britain would use its best endeavours to facilitate the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people. At that time the population of Palestine was 700,000 of which 574,000 were Muslims, 74,000 were Christian, and 56,000 were Jews.
1919 The Palestinians convened their first National Conference and expressed their opposition to the Balfour Declaration.
1920 The San Remo Conference granted Britain a mandate over Palestine and two years later Palestine was effectively under British administration, and Sir Herbert Samuel, a declared Zionist, was sent as Britain's first High Commissioner to Palestine.
1936 The Palestinians held a six-month General Strike to protest against the confiscation of land and Jewish immigration.
1939 The British government published a new White Paper restricting Jewish immigration and offering independence for Palestine within ten years. This was rejected by the Zionists, who then organised terrorist groups and launched a bloody campaign against the British and the Palestinians. The aim was to drive them both out of Palestine and to pave the way for the establishment of the Zionist state.
1947 The United Nations approved the partition under which the Palestinian Arabs, who accounted for 70% of the population and owned 92% of the land, were allocated 47% of the country.
1948 British forces withdrew from Palestine in May and the Zionists proclaimed the state of Israel without defining its borders. Arab armies moved to defend the Palestinians.
1949 A cease fire was finally agreed. The Zionists controlled 77% of Palestinian land and over 1 million Palestinians were forced to leave their country. The West Bank was put under Jordanian control and the Gaza Strip under Egyptian control.
1964 The Palestine Liberation Organisation was established.
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
Is it an identity crisis?
Posted: Thursday, September 27, 2001
( Bhekin ) I've been watching world events for the past two weeks and, obviously, what happened in America last week has dominated these events. One thing that I found particularly interesting is how this event, like all other similar events, has shaken peoples' identities. People who identified themselves as Americans started fearing what they called an "anti-Arab or anti-Muslim backlash", and in some cases they were proven right by the way things have unfolded. For example, the first people to be suspected (just like in the Oklahoma bombing) were Muslims/Arabs, both those in Arab countries and those who identified themselves as Americans, i.e. those in America. If these people really believe that they are American, why does fear come over them in events like this? If the American government accepts them as Americans, why does it start by blaming them before it finds out who really did it and why?
Blacks in America seem to be in the same situation, those who call themselves African-Americans are treated by other Americans the same as those who identify themselves as Africans in America (the same as other Black people are treated all over the world). Not to mention Hispanics, Red Indians, etc.
What is an American? Who decides?
In South Africa it is the same, most Black people identify themselves as the "rainbow nation" in the "new" South Africa, but President Thabo Mbeki at some stage admitted that there are two kinds of South Africans, those who are white and rich (the minority) and those who are Black and poor (the majority). And then there are also some who identify themselves as "Coloureds", but in the eyes of the "system" they are Blacks. Can Blacks in South Africa be called South Africans when they are treated by the system as foreigners in their own country? Should we be happy with the situation as it is or should these people identify themselves with other Blacks, i.e. those in Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Congo, Burkina Faso, etc. If one identifies oneself as a South African, is one saying that Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Congo, Ivory Coast, etc. do not belong to him/her.
What is this thing called identity? Is there a worldwide identity crisis? If there is, how should it be solved?
POST YOUR VIEWS ON TRINICENTER FORUM
___________________________________________________________
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
Earliest presence of humans in east Asia
Posted: Thursday, September 27, 2001
By BBC News Online's Helen Briggs
Stone tools dated to 1.36 million years ago provide the earliest evidence yet of human occupation of northeast Asia.
The tools, which were found at an ancient settlement in northern China, show that early humans were able to adapt to extremes of temperature relatively early in their history.
The crude implements were likely to have been made by early humans known as Homo erectus, a predecessor to our own species, Homo sapiens.
According to many scientists, Homo erectus was the first early human to move out of Africa to populate Asia and Europe.
The tools were found as far as 40 degrees north - at Xiaochangliang in the Nihewan Basin, north China.
This comes as a surprise because the area was thought to be inhospitable to early humans of the time, which were used to warmer climes. It suggests that early humans emerged from the tropics with an inbuilt ability to adapt to their environment.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/
tech/newsid_1564000/1564421.stm
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
Why Trust Arabs: Who clouds priorities
Posted: Thursday, September 20, 2001
( Sam Burnham ) It disturbs me to know that we are not carefull enough in what we say and know concerning the recent and indescriminant attaks by evil people in New York. Some of us seem to think this attack has created some positive outcomes...it has not. Some think America is the first Nation to rush to eveyone's aid... this is only true under very, very, very, selfish circumstances! Some are trying to rationalize the killing of innocent people and equate it to the struggle of black folk...black freedom fighters have nothing in common with these devils, neither would true freedom fighters of any ethnicity. Black people..Where are our priorities???
First of all, we all know Amerikkka has no love for us black folk and really don't care to much for other "minorities" either. However, we should NOT identify with the "Arab world" just because they have been oppressed! Keep in mind that the Eastern Slave trade was the Catalyst for the Transatlantic Slave trade. The Eastern slave trade, for those who don't know, involved "white" Arabs, "white Asians", and Caste System loving people from India who were...and are...no less racists and anti-black/African than European whites. As our brothers and sisters in Sudan and Mauratania fight against extinction and Arabanization from black sellouts and downright racist Arabs, we identify with people in "Palistine" who have yet to identify with our struggle collectively. Many people who are being oppressed now by Euoropeans were oppressing us prior to that time! where are our priorities. I'm sure I'll recieve the usual attacks and accusations of being "anti-Islamic" or "the Arabs were black" (actually the black original black folk in the Arabian Penensula were Sabeans...and never considered themselves Arabs), etc.
Some will even say that the modern Arab slave trade is a "Jewish Conspiracy" even though Chancellor Williams and Moctar Teyeb (A Pan-Africanst and ex-Mauratanian slave respectively)have been spreading the word in the 70's and 80's, none of them relying on info from "Jewish" folk! But that's not the point. Are we sincere in our struggle to be free, or just identifying with eveyone else? Just because others hate America and are willing to destroy US along with THEM (Euro-Americans), is this a reason to rationalize or justify the recent murder of innocent bystanders? I think not. Furthermore, many of these folk were black! should the murder of our black brothers and sisters be brushed off as "casualties of war"? No! A true warrior would not target civilians...these devils did! This was a massacar, not a war on America.
Second...yes...America helped create the anti-American sentiment that led to these attacks. However, a true freedom fighter would not sacrifice the lives of innocents just to kill a handfull of people who perhaps did deserve death. As far as the America helping everyone out thing, we ought to know "The Art of War", when we see it. The fact Euro-America sends more "aid" to nations and people who don't need it in one month than they do to "third world" nations and "relief efforts" in an entire year! Hhhhhmmmm!
We must remember that Euro-America is running the show here in America and will always put Euro-Americans, Europeans, and other whites above black folk whenever and where ever possible. Furthermore, most of the aid America "rushes" to give other nations, or domestics "in need' have constrictions designed to economically oppress, not help, the intended recipiants. In some areas, America covertly supports dictators and publicly "rush" to the aid of the dictator's vicitims. This is excellent for creating the false image of a "kinder gentler nation" that George Bush Sr talked about. Under this false image, America can destabalize nations, thus destabalizing their economies, thus compelling them to ask the U.S., IMF, World Bank, for aid.
Since America has a strong economic stake in the IMF and World Bank, this is an excellent form of covert ECONOMIC WARFARE on "third world" nations. Hhhmmm! Examples of this can be found in the "history" of El Salvador, Haiti, and...Afghanistan! The U.S. used the Taliban to push out the Russians in during the "cold war". Now their enemies. Hhhmmm! During the Iran-Contra Scandal, for example, the U.S. used Drug Money to help finance the Contra's in Nicaragua. This drug money was derived largely from black and Latino neigborhoods...with the full knowledge of high ranking members of the CIA, FBI, police departments, white businessmen in suits,etc. When the scandal began to unfold, America did not rush to our aid! They accused black folk of "being paranoid" or "blaming white Americans for eveything".
No, America rushes to help itself, while doing just enough for PR purposes! As far as American individuals giving Aid to others, we must realize that America is economically among the richest nations in the world. Thus those with humanity in their hearts will give what they can. Since America, Britian, France, etc economically oppress other nations and steal their wealth...it is NOT suprising why no one is "rushing" to help us...they collectively are not able!
Should we get those responsible for the recent events in New York. Of course! However, going to war against an entire country when we have the resources to find and destroy those responsible is immoral, politically motivated, and likely to start a U.S. verses Arab war. The escalation in terrorist attacks would soon follow. Therefore, we should understand why one person in congress was wise enough not to vote for war. She already voted for Bush's plan to "hunt down" the terrorist. If we truly want justice...not revenge...then we will only "war" against those responsible. Terrorist don't claim any nationalism to any country, so why should we make Any nation a scapegoat? Isreali Commando's ventured into various nations, even as far as Brazil, to "kidnap" Nazi war criminals and bring them to justice. This happened in the 50's and 60's via Isreali's that bought U.S. technology and training! Since they got it from America, there is no excuse why America can't use these same principals...which are much improve from
the 60's...to hunt down the devils responsible...without starting a war!
We need to be about keeping our issues as a top priority. Nothing good will come out of the recent attacks...especially for blacks. Now the U.S. government, supported by thousands of "grieving" whites, are trying to make racial profiling legal! We should not get caught up in the "patriotism", "pull together America" slogans, etc. Neither should we buy the fantasy world that eveyone oppressed by Euro-America is down with us. They are not.
We need to be about black people and their "need to know" what is affecting them and how.
peace
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
Patriotism? Just White Nationalism
Posted: Tuesday, September 18, 2001
Alafia Ndugu.
This so-called patriotism (which is really more arrogance than patriotism) will not last as long as we think it will. Sooner or later, Afrikan men in America will continue to be police profiled, Afrikan children in America will have their intellect questioned, Afrikan nations will continue to be destabilized for no clear reason other than greed.
It is straight hypocritical for this media to make it appear as if all is well here other than this tragic event. For those with either short memories or no inclination toward history, what happened to Afrikan people in this country AFTER the nation was rallied to 'defend democracy' in World War One??? What happened to Afrikan people in this country after the 'great nazi threat' was put down in World War Two???
Hypocrisy has NEVER been as blatant and at the same time as misleading as it has been in the last few days.
Am I being callious toward those families that may have lost loved ones in this 'mess'???
That would be up to those that read this. But i will never be drawn into some false sense of American patriotism and forget what has happened and continues to happen to certain groups of people in this nation.
And to think, there are capitalists out there making millions feeding people's so-called patriotism.
Interestingly, those whites that find themselves roaming streets with bats and sticks looking for some "foreigner" to exact vengeance upon are the very same ones that don't want to be lumped together with the sins of their slave-holding fore fathers and mothers.
I can hear them now: "I didn't have anything to do with slavery. Why should i pay???"
Tarikh Tehuti Bandele
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
War of the flea
Posted: Tuesday, September 18, 2001
( Bukka Rennie ) What a world! What could the perpetrators of last Tuesday's dastardly, devastating horror of the levelling of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, symbolic seats of American capitalism and military might, really hope to gain?
They hope that America will eternally be true to its history and its national psyche. They hope that America, just as was the case in the aftermath of Pearl Harbour, will bomb the Arab regions into smithereens, confiscate the properties of Arab-Americans and imprison them in concentration camps, that the American news media with all their famous anchor-personnel will work their people's emotions to the hilt and whip up a frenzy given their penchant for melodrama, that American people will vent their spleen on their Arab-American neighbours, beating them up and, with the help of the police force, kill Arab-Americans in the street, etc.
The strategy of the powerless against the powerful is always about crawling into the bowels and hair of the powerful to create and foster internal animosity and strife, to expose the powerful-stupid bully with the big stick who paints all and sundry with a broad brush and who, in so doing, creates greater multitudes of victims and more harm to his own interests. It is all about utilising time and space to gain will and build resolve. It is the war of the flea.
Only time will tell if America once again will prove to be true to its past. So far, there is not much coming from American leadership to suggest that they have woken up. They seem hell bent on continuing to police the world, to beat everyone into shape and to "get rid of the low-down dirty dogs". They still seem not to understand who and what they are up against.
The pet labels of "terrorists" and "cowardly-criminals" against "freedom", etc can no longer fit the bill. Such labels are merely escapist mechanisms geared to prevent people, all of us, from facing up to the responsibility of asking the real questions: who are these people and why have they concluded that only such ultimate, desperate acts done in the name of their God can get the world to pay heed to their realities and human condition?
Only human beings, precisely because of our sense of reason and intelligence that connects past, present and future, can plan and commit such acts. Animals possess no such capacity.
If you take the view that all the alleged enemies of America are "non-people", infinitely evil, without any "truths" of their own, and if the people in the Arab regions were to do likewise, seeing all US citizens as ungodly "ugly Americans", then the whole world will never progress beyond this point.
We need at this time, particularly after Tuesday's debacle, to recognise and pay homage to each other, even to the "fleas" and the "mole-crickets" of the earth. They are people too!
Globalisation means exactly that. No one must be excluded and marginalised. No longer is anyone innocent, we are all responsible for each other and the sustainability of each other's human presence. Everybody has to be empowered to function.
There can no longer be any one group or any one nation policing the whole world for the sake only of its particular and specific political-economic interests. That will no longer be tolerated. There can no longer be "power" without "morality".
The late James Baldwin, probably the author with the most insightful analyses of the American psyche, said the following in his treatise titled "No Name in the Street":
"...In the under-developed nations... the most dedicated of the natives are driven mad or inactive or underground by frustration; while the misery of the hapless, voiceless millions is increased and not only that: their reaction to their misery is described to the world as criminal...
"Moreover as habits of thought reinforce and sustain the habits of power, it is not even remotely possible for the excluded to become included, for this inclusion means, precisely, the end of the status-quo.
"For power truly to feel itself menaced, it must somehow sense itself in the presence of another power or, more accurately, an energy which it has not known how to define and therefore does not really know how to control...
"For a very long time, for example, America prospered; ...this prosperity cost millions of people their lives... (America) cannot, or dare not, assess or imagine the price paid by their victims, or subjects, for (America's) way of life, and so they cannot afford to know why the victims are revolting. They (the Americans) are forced, then, to the conclusion that the victims the barbarians are revolting against all established civilised values...
"This is a formula for a nation's or a kingdom's decline, for no kingdom can maintain itself by force alone. Force does not work the ways its advocates seem to think it does. It does not, for example, reveal to the victim the strength of his adversary. On the contrary, it reveals the weakness, even the panic of his adversary, and this revelation invests the victim with patience.
"Furthermore, it is ultimately fatal to create too many victims... and as the honour roll of victims expands, so does their will become inexorable; they resolve that these dead, their brethren, will not have died in vain... (and) they realise, having endured everything, that they can endure everything..."
That was written back in 1969-1970. Baldwin is quite correct. What America faces today is not a "power" but an "energy", a morality that emerges out of decades of victimhood, a morality that emanates from the hopelessness of a particular human condition that have made certain people faceless and invisible, existing even today, in some instances as in Palestine, in caves and refugee tents, and who are quite conscious that their invisibility is their greatest strength, and that since they eke out existence out of nothing, can endure anything.
Will the big and the powerful-stupid ever learn? When General Giap told America that if they invaded Vietnam they will have to fight everyone from age nine to 99, McNamara, reputed to be of quite high IQ, laughed and suggested that no one running around all day in pajamas could defeat the greatest military power in the history of the world.
It is said that America dropped more bombs in Vietnam than the total dropped in both world wars and they were still defeated. American soldiers in Vietnam never saw who they were fighting until the evacuation of Saigon.
The logic of the typical powerful-stupid had been that if the Viet-Cong were hiding behind "trees" then they will remove the "trees". "Agent Orange" was the defoliant employed and the its carcinogenic effect is still today reeking havoc on veterans of that war.
We all must learn and learn fast, no matter how much our sensibilities are offended, the big-stick, broad brush powerful-stupid response is always counter-productive. Forget all the nonsense propaganda about people wanting to take away "America's freedom" and "destroy the civilised world", nothing could be further from the reality. America represents a benchmark in humanity's long march, and the point is that no one wants to be left out.
Gandhi was prophetic when he spoke words to the effect that: "The significance of nations should be measured not by their power and control over others but by their kindness and willingness to co-operate for mutual development."
That bigness of spirit is what is now essential, if not, we all may fly off the handle, engaging in prolonged, never-ending warfare, wondering, after each smooth, effective strike on either side, about whose God is more God. Then it's back to the stone-age days of crusades and infidels.
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
Perceiving the US Situation
Posted: Tuesday, September 18, 2001
( Michael Albert ) Beyond Bush and his ilk predictably trying to use calamity to propel their reactionary agendas on every front they can, from repressive legislation about eavesdropping, to military expansion, and even to tax policy -- it is certainly also true and must be faced that many citizens are in a violent mood, suggesting all kinds of anti-civilian acts. So many that it feels overwhelming.
But how many U.S. citizens who are advocating bombings realize that the people of Afghanistan already live in a horrendously war-torn country, made virtually rubble from its war with Russia? How many understand that hunger and the danger of starvation for Afghanistan is so great that a misstep at this juncture – for example, cutting off all outside food aid, even without bombs – could cause not thousands but literally millions of innocent deaths by starvation? Not many of our citizens, is my guess. When such information is conveyed, how many will hold to the vengeful stance? When it becomes evident that vengeance by assault on civilians is precisely terrorism, that assault on civilians for political purposes is precisely terrorism, how many will want to hold to warring indiscriminately, to being a terrorist? One wonders how many of those working at Ground Zero in NYC would wish military devastation on innocent civilians in another country. Not many, if any, is my guess.
But what is even more promising, is that even in a moment of great pain and mourning, even at a time of national rallying, even when all public pressures cry for war, even before there has been opportunity to counter media madness and government manipulation with valid argument and evidence, even now many and probably most people are already wondering at least somewhat about the wisdom of Bush’s stance, and are even contemplating such unspeakable conclusions as that the cure for terrorism is not more and even greater terrorism, and that the cure for fanaticism is not to dispense with civil liberties.
I think there may be a tendency afoot among many activists, totally understandable, to see the great outpourings of nationalism and to be pessimistic beyond what evidence warrants. Yes, the events have been horrible in their immediate impact, of course. And yes the hypocritical willingness of Bush and others to try to parlay pain into more suffering in different forms, and even into more terror, has been stunning and terrifying. But there are good signs too – not solely in the humanity of the massive outpourings of sympathy, but also in the opposition to race hatred against Arabs that has erupted as quickly and perhaps more pervasively than the reverse, and in the almost instantaneous emergence of both reason and activism regarding war prospects.
Thus I want to share with you information from a communication from Portland Oregon. The letter writer communicates that:
“Today we had an anti-war demo in Portland. Like so many of you have expressed, I too have felt that we are heading into a very dark time for activism, no less radical politics.
“Now, Portland has seen a fair amount of activism lately - events large (1500+ for this year's May Day march, which had a permit taken out by the City Council because organizers refused to get one and the city didn't want to arrest everyone) and small (40 radical activists and union brothers and sisters shutting down the Port of Portland and delaying the offloading of an Italian vessel in protest of the G8 police rioting, a picket line which the longshoremen refused to cross, setting off similar actions as that ship proceeded along the west coast).
“I say all that for context, because I reckon things are a bit "better" here for that sort of activism than in many other communities around the country.
“Having said that, this was the largest demonstration I've been to in Portland since the Gulf War! Organizers were able to do a pretty good count as we were walking along a narrow area, and there were at least 2600 people there to speak against the incessant beating of the war drums.
“Nobody could believe it. Everyone (strangers I talked to, acquaintances I talked to) had been feeling very isolated and had taken on a very bleak attitude about the future of `the left.’
“We marched in the streets without a permit, spanning 12 or more blocks. There were no police anywhere to be seen. “This caused some problems, in that they *do* tend to be helpful with traffic control. Ah, well... we did ok without 'em on that one too, a few irate drivers notwithstanding :-)
“Well, 2600 isn't enough to stop the impending war, but it's a far bigger start than anyone expected. All is not lost! Let's not let our gloomy perspectives of the moment, (which are perfectly understandable as we watch the manufacture of consent occur before our very eyes, at breakneck speed) let's not let that gloom turn our very rational fears into a self-fulfilling prophesy.
“Afterward, I went to a `vigil’ organized by the Christian Coalition :-( This occurred in the main `public’ square in town (semi-privately owned and operated). There were fewer people at this one, but not by much. The creepy rhetoric of right-wing Christianity was toned down, but not by much. At least it was toned down though. We were there mostly in case of needing to protect any victims of the racism seething beneath the surface.
“I stood amidst the sea of American flags, amidst the `rousing’ renditions of the great patriotic hits, holding a `Jingoism Hurts America’ sign. I got into some rather interesting conversations with people who wanted to know what jingoism meant. I described it as a form of rhetoric using a chauvinistic patriotism to justify an arrogant and belligerent foreign policy. Some nodded and walked away, but many lingered to discuss. My friends and I were only too happy to oblige :-) With some sensitivity, it is possible to clue people in on the activities of the CIA in the overthrow of democratic governments, the institution of autocratic regimes such as the Taliban, and the creation of Osama bin Laden himself.
“I couldn't believe the conversations! Who knows if we did anything. Anyhow, it's not necessarily doom and gloom - let's get back out there and be visible, now!
I got the above letter without a return email address for its author. But here is my reply…Yes, you did something. You did precisely what we all need to be doing. You went out and worked for peace and justice, and you did it without fear and without arrogance, and without presuppositions. And you showed, in the process, what the potential is of such work.
http://www.zmag.org/perceiving.htm
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
The Greatest Argument Against War
Posted: Monday, September 17, 2001
( Brian Dominick ) On Wednesday, September 12, I was witness to the greatest argument against war the North American Left has ever had.
I've never liked New York City. I've only gone there for the most compelling of reasons. When I awoke to the horrifying news of the incidents there on Tuesday morning -- still occurring, unbeknownst to anyone -- I already knew I would be going again. As a certified emergency medical technician, and a radical activist with street experience in mass casualty scenarios (through my involvement in the little-known field called "action medical"), it wasn't a matter of weighing options. The only questions were how? and how soon?
I have told my story in great detail elsewhere. It isn't a story about my own heroism. It isn't a story about life-threatening or life-saving adventure. I wish it were. If I'd had any opportunity for heroism, any opportunity to save lives, that would mean so too did thousands of others. We already know thousands of lives were saved. My story begins at a point when there was little remaining success in such endeavors. It is a story about tragedy.
My partner, Rachel, and I spent most of the day Wednesday working in the decontamination area at St. Vincent's Trauma Center, one of the main hospitals where blast victims and injured rescuers had been and were being taken. We had the opportunity to meet dozens of emergency workers, and treated several of them for minor injuries and contamination resulting from their participation in this most massive of rescue operations.
What we did not see is even more depressing. Our job was to strip and scrub victims when they were first brought in, so the soot they'd arrive covered in would not contaminate the rest of the hospital., then deliver them to the ER. Unfortunately, despite rumors (even over official channels), these rescued victims simply weren't showing up. While the rest of the world was hoping and praying more rescues would be made, it was becoming ominously obvious at St. Vincent's that there would quite simply be few more survivors, if any.
In all, I would meet and talk to dozens of EMTs, hospital staff, firefighters, and other emergency workers. There was by now more exhaustion than dust in the air. Both tasted identical. One doctor who sat down near us was literally surprised by how it felt to actually sit down. It had been 24 hours, he announced, since he hadn't had his full weight on his feet. One nurse complained that her feet were so sore she was having trouble standing, much less walking -- I could only imagine.
What I didn't hear, at all, were emergency workers of any kind clamoring for retaliation or war. In fact, it occurs to me that one of the only groups of people in this country which isn't demanding vengeance are the very people tasked with taking care of survivors, and recovering the thousands of bodies left in the mess.
Among rescue and medical personnel in New York, the focus was on saving lives, not on taking more. This is certainly due in part to the necessity of staying focused on the job at hand, even during much-needed breaks. However, I think this restraint is also being shown because few people involved in the rescue efforts can bring themselves to wish upon others what they are currently going through.
That night, we milled around for a while, checking in with some EMTs to see how they were holding up. We actually engaged in a very normal, generic medical conversation with one EMT. Anything for a distraction...
It was during such a conversation that Senator Chuck Schumer passed by us while we sat on the steps to the ER. He stopped and turned to us. "I know what you've all been doing," he said. "You're all heroes." Four or five of us just stared back at him. I'm not sure about our newfound friends, but Rachel, Meredith and I didn't feel like heroes. It was odd to be referred to as such. We didn't know what to say. No one spoke. He didn't seem to mind. He turned and left.
After a little discussion, and a few cups of coffee handed over by smiling volunteers, we decided to go deeper into the security zones with us. We headed down on foot. We wouldn't need to consult a map -- smoke still rising skyward marked our heading for us.
It was well over a mile to Ground Zero. Halfway there, a police officer put us in a DPW truck and told the drivers to deliver us to the site. I was no longer surprised that, for this moment in time, not only were cops uninterested in bashing my head, they would go out of their way to help us try to be helpful. The oddities were piling up with the rubble. Many of them were welcome.
What we found at The Site was an incredible scene. A light grey ash was met by reflections and glares of floodlights overhead, giving every still surface the appearance of having been lightly snowed upon. Where water from fire hoses or water main leaks had come in contact with this substance, it created small pools that resembled slush. I almost shivered by association, but alas we had had beautiful weather all day, and it remained quite warm even after dark. In fact, it felt oddly warmer near the site than it had at the hospital.
Here the National Guard presence was quite obvious. We hadn't seen many Guardsmen before arriving at The Site. After asking around, we made our way to a place where dozens of ambulances were stationed in front of a school building. Here again we had the sense of being useless. Not because we weren't official or connected or skilled enough to help -- but because there was simply nothing for EMS to do. Few if any survivors were being recovered. The scene was a grim convention of chauffeurs awaiting passengers who were simply not going to arrive.
It was at The Site that the extent of this tragedy finally began to settle in on me. Until then, as for most people in the country and around the world, this monumental event had been a story, just like any other major piece of news. Granted, I had come all this way, expecting to experience the tragedy for myself, but it was difficult to accept that out of so many thousands of people known to have been in or around the buildings, so few were going to emerge. EMS workers milled about everywhere, attempting to ignore the fact that we were being ignored by those excavating the site, who simply didn't require our specialized assistance.
Fire crews marched into the misty air floating over the rubble, toward the flood lights and away from us. I wanted to follow them, but there was a limit to where my EMT credentials would allow me access. Most of what they were pulling out was concrete. That which was organic was far more likely to be a corpse or a body part than a living human being.
One of the things I noticed about Ground Zero was that pretty much the only people not wearing respirators or masks of some kind were the firefighters themselves. Nearly all EMS, National Guard and police personnel were covering their faces for protection from the dust. It was no secret that all sorts of horrible chemicals and substances were floating around in all that particulate debris. Yet almost none of the firefighters seemed to be wearing respiratory protection.
After thinking long and hard about that, I decided it might well be a demonstration of solidarity for their brethren trapped below. All day one got the impression that, for the firefighters, the sense of urgency was higher than for most everyone else. They all knew people buried beneath the rubble. Additionally, they identified with them very strongly. It reminded me of the bond among action medics, and the way I've seen my fellow action medics behave in the streets when medics were injured or in trouble.
We wandered into the command center -- the school cafeteria -- and made one last attempt to get involved through official channels. There the EMS dispatch officer expressed more gratitude, but explained that "freelance EMS people" were being told to go home. He saw our St. Vincent's security passes and inquired about the status there. I knew he didn't want to know "how many" patients were being brought in, like everyone else did. He knew that number all too well. We just told him St. Vincent's was running smoothly, and he seemed glad to hear it.
I sat down at a table, and noticed a piece of paper with a color photo attached to it. The picture was of a young woman in her early twenties. It had her name and other identifying information on it. Her family had managed to pass it along this far. She was missing. And like everyone else who was missing, she was presumed dead.
We didn't want to leave New York, but staying there had become too painful for me. Being unable to help kept me acutely aware of just how terrible this tragedy was. I didn't think I could stand it anymore.
The drive home was as fast as the drive down. It was more silent, though. We alternated between listening to the news -- which we'd hardly done all day -- and listening to music CDs. A million thoughts stewed around in my head. It felt good to have been able to do something, but in context, it seemed we'd done almost nothing at all. For medics, there simply wasn't enough to be done.
We listened to irate voices on the news, trying to reconcile the attitudes of those calling for vengeful murder, with those rescue workers struggling for life. This new wave of bloodlust, it occurred to me, is more a result of feeling helpless, than of anything rational or reasonable.
When we cry out for violence, we are indeed asking our leaders to do to other civilians and rescue workers precisely what has happened to us here. Let us use great caution and prudence in our solutions to this horror. We owe that to our counterparts the world over -- people who by no means deserve to suffer the way we are now.
I think most people, having seen what I just have, would be hesitant to call for an expansion of this horror. Our country's first-hand experience with the reality of warlike violence will prove, in the end, our best leverage against engaging in yet another senseless bloodbath. Now that we have felt the pain our nation has continually and relentlessly dealt other nations, we have a unique opportunity to learn the lessons of the images and ravages of war even before we start.
[Brian Dominick is a street first aid instructor and an active street medic, affiliated with the NorthEast Action Medics Association (NEAMA) and the Radical Emergency Squad (RESQ). Besides being a medic, Brian is a political commentator, a website developer/editor for ZNet (www.zmag.org), and a community activist.]
http://www.zmag.org/dominickcalam.htm
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
Why I will not rally around the president
Posted: Monday, September 17, 2001
( Robert Jensen ) We are told that in this time of crisis, all good Americans should rally around the president and the flag.
I will rally, but not around a leader calling for war or a symbol of nationalism.
It is easy to understand the emotion behind the chanting of "USA, USA." But I will not chant.
In this time of crisis, I will rally around policies that seek peace and security, for all people everywhere. And instead of chanting, I will speak quietly about the grief we all feel, and loudly about the need to resist our leaders' plans for global war.
Decent people agree that in this time of crisis, we cannot let the lines of color and culture, of language and religion, divide us. But we need to go another step, to understand that the lines dividing people based on nations are just as dangerous. We must also agree not to give in to the urge to value the lives of innocent Americans over the lives of innocent people in other countries.
For the past few days -- in person and on the phone, through email and on the radio -- I have been called "unpatriotic," condemned as a "traitor" and labeled "anti-American" because my writing has opposed the drive to war, the call for blood to avenge those who died in the terror attacks.
But I also have heard from many others who also are concerned that U.S. officials will take us into a war that will bring only more death, pain and grief, leaving us less secure. They want to speak out but fear being attacked for not being "good Americans."
This is a moment when we need the courage to say that being a good American does not mean supporting a war so violent and so indiscriminate that more innocent people will die.
That does not mean we renounce the ideals of freedom and justice so often associated with the United States; we should hold onto those ideals more fiercely than ever and put them into practice by resisting the rush to war.
We should honor the ideals of this country by saying, in as clear a voice as we can manage: Not in our name will the United States seek vengeance or go forward to kill.
It is important to read closely the joint resolution passed by Congress, which authorizes the president "to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons."
That is not a resolution based on a quest for justice. It is an open-ended invitation to attack anyone U.S. leaders decide to target. And those leaders -- Dick Cheney and Colin Powell among them -- are some of the same people who during the Gulf War unleashed attacks not only on military targets but on civilians and the entire civilian infrastructure of Iraq, killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people during and after the war. This resolution, and the statements from the Bush administration about an ongoing global war, suggest that what is coming will be even more frightening.
When we speak out against war in public, we will find support, but we also should expect hostility. We should expect the question posed by one of the people who wrote to condemn me: "Whose side are you on?"
The answers to that are simple:
I am on the side of the people -- no matter where they live -- who will suffer the violence, not the leaders -- no matter where they live -- who will plan it.
I am on the side of peace, not war.
I am on the side of justice, not vengeance.
And most important, I am on the side of hope, not despair.
We do not have the luxury of despair right now. There is too much at stake for too many people.
Robert Jensen is a professor of journalism at the University of Texas at Austin. He can be reached at rjensen@uts.cc.utexas.edu.
http://www.zmag.org/jensenres.htm
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
The United States and Middle East: Why Do "They" Hate Us?
Posted: Monday, September 17, 2001
( Stephen R. Shalom ) The list below presents specific incidents of U.S. policy in the Middle East. The list minimizes the grievances against the United States in the region because it excludes more generalized long-standing policies, such as U.S. backing for authoritarian regimes (arming Saudi Arabia, training the secret police in Iran under the Shah, providing arms and aid to Turkey as it ruthlessly attacked Kurdish villages, etc.) The list also excludes actions of Israel in which the United States is indirectly implicated because Israel has been the leading or second-ranking recipient of U.S. aid for many years and has received U.S. high-tech weaponry and the diplomatic benefit of U.S. veto power in the Security Council.
1948: Israel established. U.S. declines to press Israel to allow expelled Palestinians to return.
1949: CIA backs military coup deposing elected government of Syria.
1953: CIA helps overthrow the democratically-elected Mossadeq government in Iran (which had nationalized the British oil company) leading to a quarter-century of repressive and dictatorial rule by the Shah, Mohammed Reza Pahlevi.
1956: U.S. cuts off promised funding for Aswan Dam in Egypt after Egypt receives Eastern bloc arms.
1956: Israel, Britain, and France invade Egypt. U.S. does not support invasion, but the involvement of its NATO allies severely diminishes Washington's reputation in the region.
1958: U.S. troops land in Lebanon to preserve "stability".
early 1960s: U.S. unsuccessfully attempts assassination of Iraqi leader, Abdul Karim Qassim.
1963: U.S. reported to gives Iraqi Ba'ath party (soon to be headed by Saddam Hussein) names of communists to murder, which they do with vigor.
1967-: U.S. blocks any effort in the Security Council to enforce SC Resolution 244, calling for Israeli withdrawal from territories occupied in the 1967 war.
1970: Civil war between Jordan and PLO. Israel and U.S. prepare to intervene on side of Jordan if Syria backs PLO.
1972: U.S. blocks Sadat's efforts to reach a peace agreement with Egypt.
1973: U.S. military aid enables Israel to turn the tide in war with Syria and Egypt.
1973-75: U.S. supports Kurdish rebels in Iraq. When Iran reaches an agreement with Iraq in 1975 and seals the border, Iraq slaughters Kurds and U.S. denies them refuge. Kissinger secretly explains that "covert action should not be confused with missionary work."
1978-79: Iranians begin demonstrations against the Shah. U.S. tells Shah it supports him "without reservation" and urges him to act forcefully. Until the last minute, U.S. tries to organize military coup to save the Shah, but to no avail.
1979-88: U.S. begins covert aid to Mujahideen in Afghanistan six months before Soviet invasion in Dec. 1979. Over the next decade U.S. provides training and more than $3 billion in arms and aid.
1980-88: Iran-Iraq war. When Iraq invades Iran, the U.S. opposes any Security Council action to condemn the invasion. U.S. soon removes Iraq from its list of nations supporting terrorism and allows U.S. arms to be transferred to Iraq. At the same time, U.S. lets Israel provide arms to Iran and in 1985 U.S. provides arms directly (though secretly) to Iran. U.S. provides intelligence information to Iraq. Iraq uses chemical weapons in 1984; U.S. restores diplomatic relations with Iraq. 1987 U.S. sends its navy into the Persian Gulf, taking Iraq's side; an overly-aggressive U.S. ship shoots down an Iranian civilian airliner, killing 290.
1981, 1986: U.S. holds military maneuvers off the coast of Libya in waters claimed by Libya with the clear purpose of provoking Qaddafi. In 1981, a Libyan plane fires a missile and two Libyan planes shot down. In 1986, Libya fires missiles that land far from any target and U.S. attacks Libyan patrol boats, killing 72, and shore installations. When a bomb goes off in a Berlin nightclub, killing two, the U.S. charges that Qaddafi was behind it (possibly true) and conducts major bombing raids in Libya, killing dozens of civilians, including Qaddafi's adopted daughter.
1982: U.S. gives "green light" to Israeli invasion of Lebanon, killing more than 10,000 civilians. U.S. chooses not to invoke its laws prohibiting Israeli use of U.S. weapons except in self-defense.
1983: U.S. troops sent to Lebanon as part of a multinational peacekeeping force; intervene on one side of a civil war. Withdraw after suicide bombing of marine barracks.
1984: U.S.-backed rebels in Afghanistan fire on civilian airliner.
1988: Saddam Hussein kills many thousands of his own Kurdish population and uses chemical weapons against them. The U.S. increases its economic ties to Iraq.
1990-91: U.S. rejects any diplomatic settlement of the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait (for example, rebuffing any attempt to link the two regional occupations, of Kuwait and of Palestine). U.S. leads international coalition in war against Iraq. Civilian infrastructure targeted. To promote "stability" U.S. refuses to aid post-war uprisings by Shi'ites in the south and Kurds in the north, denying the rebels access to captured Iraqi weapons and refusing to prohibit Iraqi helicopter flights.
1991-: Devastating economic sanctions are imposed on Iraq. U.S. and Britain block all attempts to lift them. Hundreds of thousands die. Though Security Council had stated that sanctions were to be lifted once Saddam Hussein's programs to develop weapons of mass destruction were ended, Washington makes it known that the sanctions would remain as long as Saddam remains in power. Sanctions in fact strengthen Saddam's position. Asked about the horrendous human consequences of the sanctions, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright declares that "the price is worth it."
1993-: U.S. launches missile attack on Iraq, claiming self-defense against an alleged assassination attempt on former president Bush two months earlier.
1998: U.S. and U.K. bomb Iraq over the issue of weapons inspections, even though Security Council is just then meeting to discuss the matter.
1998: U.S. destroys factory producing half of Sudan's pharmaceutical supply, claiming retaliation for attacks on U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya and that factory was involved in chemical warfare. U.S. later acknowledges there is no evidence for the chemical warfare charge.
http://www.zmag.org/shalomhate.htm
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
MARVELLING: The Conference On Racism
Posted: Saturday, September 15, 2001
( Orlando Marville ) The Conference on Racism has ended with the usual resolutions, but with a certain taste of defeat. I wonder if I am exaggerating when I suggest that this was a planned ending, with everyone saying that racism is the opposite of motherhood, but everyone somehow escaping any responsibility for what has happened to millions of persons on this globe. I would wish to make some observations on some of the fundamental problems involved in the idea of the conference.
The idea of a conference on racism was an excellent one. Racism is as rampant, if not more so, as it was in the distant seventeenth and eighteenth centuries when Europe began to talk of “progress” and of Indo-Europeans, when they pretended that Greece had created all the wisdom that mankind possessed independently and that Egypt was more of a backward, stagnant society than the marvel of civilisation and social organisation that it had been.
Racism grew up with the slave trade and Europe’s burgeoning cockiness that it was able to go out and conquer the rest of mankind. Surely, brutal conquest indicated a definitive superiority. Additionally, if Africans had been made into permanent slaves, how could one glorify Egypt?
Racism is a problem that we need to deal with. So is the question of what is happening in the Middle East. So is the question of the slave trade having been a crime against humanity. So is the continuing traffic in human beings in Sudan and elsewhere.
So is the horrendous treatment that colonising peoples, whether they were Spanish, white Australian, Euro-Canadian or Portuguese, dealt out to indigenous peoples everywhere. The problem arises when they are all lumped together in a single conference.
This benefits only those who have been the transgressors. They can then walk out of the conference on one pretext or another, but, if truth were to be told, they would never have been present at a conference that dealt either with slavery as a crime against humanity and reparations as the single topic of the conference, or the treatment of indigenous people in the past.
The problem was that we mistook this omnibus affair for a real opportunity to discuss the matters that are outstanding. There were, however, conferences that discussed single issues like reparations to Jewish people for the horrors of the holocaust. Was this proper? My unequivocal answer is in the affirmative.
What was done to the Jews was totally unacceptable by any modern standard that we now use, even if there are still Nazi apologists that pretend that the holocaust was a Hollywood myth. What was done to the Romer, whom we call Gypsies, by the same Nazis was even more horrendous in that it practically decimated the Romer population of Europe. By the same token, I would ask if slavery was a crime against humanity and my answer would be unequivocally yes.
It is therefore only proper that Europe apologise to the millions of descendants of the millions they enslaved and forced to work on their plantations. And, yes, there should be reparations as there were reparations for the Jews. How did the Jews succeed and we fail? There are several possible answers. However, the one that strikes me as the most compelling is that the Jews put forward their argument from a position of strength. They were organised at the level of the Press and at the level of a single state as well as in every public forum. We are not.
Indeed, while it would be extremely difficult to find anyone of the Jewish faith who would speak against reparations for the treatment that their ancestors received in the holocaust, there are some of us who think that slavery was not such a bad thing after all. Such people do not even see why anyone should talk about reparations far less try to understand what reparations involve.
Of course, they would not be averse to a bit of change in their pockets, but God forbid that we talk about reparation in terms of debt forgiveness for Africa or in terms of actually levelling the playing field or correcting the revisionist history that they taught both themselves and us. Frankly, if reparations are to mean anything, they must be focused on a correction of the past.
The simple disbursement of money will not do that. It means an apology from the Christian Church, which at every turn supported slavery. It also means an apology from that other great world religion, Islam. It means an apology to those dragged from Ireland and Scotland on the basis of some semi-slave system of indenture.
It means the recognition of where we have gone wrong as humanity and a commitment to do the right thing now and in the future.
It is simply not acceptable that the North Atlantic continue to preach about human rights as if they have some superior moral standing. We all know pretty well that they do not.
Now that we have had the conference, where do we go from here? Again, the simple answer is that we have had the conference and that is that. No! This is the sort of defeatism, which, had it been practised by the Jews would have left them in a continuing underclass to this day. We have to begin to learn from other people’s successes and not simply accept our defeats with finality.
There is only one way forward: the struggle must go on. We seem as a group of human beings, and here I refer to all of the disenfranchised, to stop whenever we gain a victory, almost as if the war had ended.
• Orlando Marville is a retired diplomat and an expert on African affairs
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
To My Baby Girl, On the Day After
Posted: Saturday, September 15, 2001
( Tim Wise ) I was not where I needed to be last night. Not physically, and not emotionally. My daughter is ten weeks old. And last night, and tonight as well, only her mother will be able to hold her, and kiss her goodnight, and hug her, and wipe up her spit.
I am somewhere else.
Tonight I will call home, and speak to my wife, who gave birth to that precious baby girl amidst such hope and pain. And in the background, I will hear that baby’s cry: as if she knows something is terribly wrong. Because babies can feel things that the rest of us have learned to repress.
And yet when I finally call I find her laughing, consumed with a desire to do nothing more than reach out, reach out, reach out, and bat at the soft hanging stars and moons that hang from her mobile.
I sigh a deep sigh of relief. The air escaping my lungs, and signifying recognition that 10-week-old babies do not, in fact, understand mass death. They have only begun, indeed, to understand their own life.
It is their parents, it is we, who must impose upon their innocent, naïve, and far preferable world, with the truth that one day mommy or daddy may leave for work and not come back.
It is the parents; it is we, who must impose upon their world, altering forever their smiling, drooling faces that you can only see through the bitter tears of your own disillusionment.
You cannot protect them. Cannot keep them young forever. Oh what I would give to be so young and naïve, as to require my mommy or daddy to wipe my nose and speak to me about anything but mass death.
It is their parents; it is we, who have to tell them of their nation’s talk of massive retaliation, and hunting down those responsible for mass death. And inflicting upon them some more mass death, to convince still others--once and for all--that mass death really doesn’t pay. And that our collective national dick is bigger than theirs.
And while I never expected to speak to you of such things at such a tender age, you might as well know that it is always and forever about the length and circumference of one’s national phallus.
Size, it seems, does matter, whether for missiles, or tall buildings, or the airplanes that bring them down. Their shapes (and make a note of it now for future reference), are no coincidence.
So if Osama Bin Laden is the man of the hour, then Al Haig and Hank Kissinger and their students--who, as it turns out know a little somethin’ ‘bout mass death--are apt to make sure he knows how killing is really done. Because they are hung like horses.
Killers have tutors, see, and the classes are full. How many people can they kill? Can we kill? (Kill, Kill). "Kill ‘em all, let God sort ‘em out." That’s what the bumper sticker prophets say. But God has better things to do, I figure, than to sort through the tangled mess that is both the New York financial district and also the human condition at this late date.
I have been in those buildings, have you? I have dropped my quarter in the silver, shiny viewfinders that you could look through, and get a close up view of Greenwich Village, or the Empire State Building, or the Hudson River, or Fort Lee, New Jersey. If for some strange and largely inexplicable reason you felt the need to see Fort Lee, with the assistance of a 1000x magnification lens.
I have dropped my quarters in slots my daughter will never see, in buildings she will never enter, on observation decks that do not exist any longer, except in my mind. And I have listened as the timer counted down the time left before the viewfinder would fade to black.
And I can imagine looking thru the viewfinder, and wondering why that plane looks so damned close.
I can imagine looking uptown as the plane came closer, and closer, and seeing Harlem, and thinking, damn: I shoulda gone to Sylvia’s Soul Food. ‘Cause Harlem, far from being the bad part of town, was one of the safest places in New York yesterday. Even terrorists know which victims count the most in America.
America, if you want safety, you’d best get your ass to the ‘hood. Get your boogie shoes to 123rd street. Move immediately into the Robert Taylor Homes, or Cabrini Green, or the lower 9th Ward in New Orleans. Do not pass go, let alone Wall Street. For there you are like sitting ducks.
And now what baby girl? Will we shed the blood of innocent babies so much like you, to demonstrate to the world how precious your life is? You had best hope not baby girl. Because if so you will never be safe. Not now, and not when you are old enough to understand, and fear, and tremble, like I am right now.
We will be signing a death warrant. If not yours, perhaps that of some other baby girl or boy. Maybe one that was being born at 8:42 this morning, while others were dying in mass death.
‘Cause what goes around, most definitely goes around, and around, and around, and around.
And all the tough talk and swagger and muscle flexing and chest thumping and pontifications that the folks who did this are cowards, cannot conceal the fact that so far there are no brave souls in the mix yet.
There is nothing brave about committing mass murder to be sure. But neither is there bravery in adding to the body count. Neither is there bravery in Senator Hatch’s testosterone-soaked diatribe about "going after the bastards," or officials saying no options are being ruled out, including nuclear weapons.
What a lesson that would teach. Like stealing the stereo of the guy who took your car to prove how much we respect private property. And then your VCR is at risk, and his watch, and your jewelry. Jewelry you could pawn on E-bay on any other day, but not tonight. ‘Cause folks are too busy bidding on chunks of the 39th floor.
So welcome to the world, dear baby girl. And sleep well tonight. And remain young for as long as you can. For one day, not so far from this day, everything will change again. As it always has.
And rivers of blood will be added to rivers of blood, all of it red and flowing downhill as blood tends to do as it seeks its own level. And mountains of bodies higher than the towers brought down on this day will be stacked: In the name of God. In the name of money. In the name of security. In the name of revenge. In the names of people with names like Osama and George and Ariel or Allah or Jesus.
Or to satisfy our desire for real, real, reality TV. So much so, that eating rats will seem like a day at Disney.
And your alarm system will not protect you baby girl. ‘The Club’ will not protect you. The police cannot protect you. Missile defense sure as shit can’t protect you. Even I can’t protect you. And I love you more than anything or anyone in this world. So my inadequacy is profound indeed
I wish that love could protect you; not just mine but that of others. But I’m not sure how much of that is left. It is on markdown; on the sale rack; on clearance; but no buyers today.
Love is too expensive for some, even when on sale. Too costly in time, if not in money. ‘Cause although money can’t buy you love, enough money can buy lots of cruise missiles, and napalm, and mass death.
It really isn’t complicated, baby girl. Most important things aren’t. You’ll learn this. Or more to the point, you’ll learn it and then forget it, as age makes you add layers of complication to what once seemed obvious. And that complexity will be called brilliance by your culture: nuance, depth. But really it’s just mostly vapid bullshit. Sterility posing as wisdom.
In the end it comes down to just a few simple truths. And while I wish I had thought of them myself, the simple truth about these simple truths is that they’ve been said before, and better than I could, by James Baldwin, who did not write them for this purpose, though they strangely seem to fit.
First, that those who treat other people as less than human must not be surprised when the bread they have cast upon the waters comes floating back to them, poisoned.
And secondly, that even in darkness, we must remember that there is a light somewhere. One discovers the light in darkness. That is what darkness is for. And what the light illuminates is danger, and what it demands is faith...I know that sometimes we fail, and that one often feels that one cannot start over again. And yet we must. The light, the light...one will perish without the light.
For nothing is fixed, forever and forever, it is not fixed. The earth is always shifting. The light is always changing. The sea does not cease to grind down rock. Generations do not cease to be born. And we are responsible to them, because we are the only witnesses they have. The sea rises, the light fails. Lovers cling to each other, and children cling to us. And the moment we break faith with one another, the sea engulfs us, and the light goes out.
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
Attack on America - the enemy is always evil
Posted: Friday, September 14, 2001
( Ijahnya Christian ) Heartical Love to the Rastafari Nation
May the Might and Iwa of the Hola Trinity reign within I an I hearts for Iver.
Blood and Fire, Death and Destruction in the USA. I an I join all Imanity in feeling the pain of the victims and their loved ones who were simply reporting to work another day - but not because Caribbean people are among them and not because all this is happening in the USA. It is the pain that I an I must feel everytime in every place for who can breathe the breath of life?
I am therefore responding to the media reportage that has given a particular face to the terrorist completely forgetting the unrepentant face of Timothy McVeigh at the time of his execution. The terrorist is the evil infidel who has different genes, a different religion and culture and who comes from a different part of the world. The mother of the terrorist feels no pain at his birth for she and his father are not created by the Almighty like the rest of us but by Satan. Decent, civilized, God-fearing people like Americans do things in a brave, civilized and God-fearing way. We train soldiers and raise armies and ask God's blessings on our troops before we go off to fight other armies, trained by other nations to respond in a similar manner. We tell righteous lies to our people about how we won the war and may or may not apologise for the tremendous loss of civilian life - not just human but the evil enemy. It is the same USA that just decided that it would not even be confronted with the demand for reparations much less issue an apology for the transatlantic slave trade as a crime against humanity. Remember, part of the rationale for our enslavement was that we were infidels, heathens who needed to be enslaved so we could be Christianised. The terrorist prays before he does the honourable thing of giving his life for his cause. Honourable? He is a coward and his god is not really God.
I say we Americans for in the Caribbean Region, our world view is shaped and influenced by the USA. For some of us this is literal as well as symbolic. Uncle Sam is really our Uncle. I live on the island of Anguilla which is still a British colony but the USA feeds us, clothes us, shelters us and provides us with medicine. We allow its greatest tool and weapon to raise our children and then wonder why their behaviours seem so akin to those they soak up so many hours of daily watching.
If America says the terrorists are evil, then they must be evil and conversely the victim nation must be good. Somehow I am helped to think not just "what a terrible act" but "what a terrible act upon so good and upright a nation as the USA." Unfortunately, the history of the USA does not look so good. Nothing much has changed in the world and shortly, we will witness more in a retaliation that will be "justified" but will not necessarily be just. The allies in the developed no doubt recognise their own vulnerabilities. We on these small islands may be of no interest to the terrorists but one good hurricane, earthquake or volcano can give us the same result.
As I reflect on the carnage, it is the words of HIM immortalised by Brother Bob as 'War' that remove not the horror but the surprise.
"Until the philosopy which holds one race superior and another inferior is finally and permanently discredited and abandoned, everywhere is War, Me say war
That until there are no longer first class and second class citizens of any nation
Until the colour of a man's skin is of no more significance than the colur of his eyes,
Me say war
That until the basic human rights are equally guaranteed to all, without regard to race,
Dis a war
That until that day
The dream of lasting peace, world citizenship,
Rule of international morality will remain but a fleeting illusion to be pursued but never attained
Now everywhere is War...
War in the East, War in the West,
War up North, War down South,
War, War, rumours of War..."
and further,
"These are crucial times when nations rise against nations, tensions increase and disaster is possible at any moment. Distances are shrinking. Peace and life itself are threatened by misunderstanding and conflict. Now is the time when man's relationship to God must be the foundation for all his efforts toward enlightenment, and learning, the basis for understanding, cooperation and peace..."
It is not the way our nation would have preferred to celebrate the New Year but let us learn from the events of September 11th. and let nothing detract us from the "basic premise...that men of all races, beliefs and status share some essential common goals..."
and further still,
"Our efforts as free men must be to establish new relationships, devoid of any resentment and hostility, restored to our belief and faith in ourselves as individuals, dealing on a basis of equality with other equally free people. We believe in cooperation and collaboration to promote the cause of international security, the equality of man and the welfare of mankind. We believe in the peaceful settlements of all disputes without resorting to force. All well ordered and modern states can only base themselves upon Courts of Justice and Conduct of Laws which are just, correct and geared towards the protection of the rights of individuals..."
Somehow I do not think that the USA is preparing to go to Court.
Just sharing the views of a Sister Empress with the Words of His Majesty. What do you think?
One Perfect Love
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
A Rastafari View of the Tragedy
Posted: Thursday, September 13, 2001
( Ras Forever ) Greetings Dearly Beloved in the name of His Imperial Majesty Emperor Haile Sellassie the First.
As Rastafari who have witnessed the most massive death and destruction caused by a combination of events and forces on Tuesday 11th September in the United States of America. We would firstly like to express our deepest and most sincere regrets to all those who are now experiencing pain and trauma that most would certainly have had no inputs in creating. Our sympathies and wishes is for quick and successful resolutions of all personal difficulties and negative effects of the aftermath of Tuesday's events.
Secondly it is hoped that none of our Rastafari Collective and their families have been affected by the tragic events. If any are, our firmest heartfelt sympathies go out to you and yours. Can you please inform of us of your respective situations as soon as you can afford to do so.
Thirdly it is imperative that the idea that anyone, anywhere in the world, can use their weapons of destruction to settle disputes among the human family, be totally denounced and condemned. The slaughter of innocent people going about their business of providing for their families is a crime against humanity, always was and always will be. So as Rastafari an emphatic rejection of any such notion is compulsory and must be non partisan.
Finally as the world has been brought to the crossroads by force to confront a moral and political crisis. The question to be asked is, can the solution to this crisis be more of the same that brought us to this path, or is it our duty to find and shine a light to show another way. As Rastafari Collective we must as a solution, support and promote enlightened leadership, which exhibits moral guidance and moves mankind away from the paths that has failed us, one that has caused so much grief, pain and suffering to our fellow man everywhere.
Rastafari can lead the way and our support right now goes out to those families and individuals who are now hurting. May Jah Almighty bring healing and comfort to all afflicted, in any manner. Jah Bless, Guide and Protect.
Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
Share your views on the Online Forums
View last 5 days / Advance search
